Re: gnus-narrow-to-head, message-narrow-to-body?

[Reiner Steib <4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de>]

On Mon, Apr 07 2003, Julien Avarre wrote:

> kai.grossjohann@gmx.net (Kai Großjohann) disait récemment  :
>
>> Reiner Steib <4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de> writes:
>> 
>> > What about `gnus-narrow-to-head' and `message-narrow-to-body'?
>> 
>> Are they needed?

I though that `message-narrow-to-body' would simplify the use of
`latin-unity-remap-region' or `latin-unity-sanity-check' on the
message body.  See the discussion on XEmacs+`latin-unity' in dcsg.

But as we can see, it might be useful in other places too:

> They can be usesul for the pattern [...]  Which is not very
> practical.  Reiner's functions should help us for moving the pgg
> pattern at the right place, am I right ?

I don't have an example for `gnus-narrow-to-head' at hand, but maybe
it should be added for completeness.

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- PGP key available via WWW   http://rsteib.home.pages.de/